=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-1920/BPM_2017_paper_204
|storemode=property
|title=Checking Business Process Modeling Guidelines in Apromore
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1920/BPM_2017_paper_204.pdf
|volume=Vol-1920
|authors=Fabrizio Fornari,Stefania Gnesi,Marcello La Rosa,Andrea Polini,Barbara Re,Giorgio O. Spagnolo
|dblpUrl=https://dblp.org/rec/conf/bpm/FornariGRPRS17
}}
==Checking Business Process Modeling Guidelines in Apromore==
https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1920/BPM_2017_paper_204.pdf
Checking Business Process Modeling Guidelines in
Apromore
Fabrizio Fornari1 , Stefania Gnesi3 , Marcello La Rosa2 , Andrea Polini1 , Barbara Re1 ,
and Giorgio O. Spagnolo3
1
Univeristy of Camerino, Italy
{fabrizio.fornari,barbara.re,andrea.polini}@unicam.it
2
Queensland University of Technology, Australia
{m.larosa}@qut.edu.au
3
ISTI-CNR of Pisa, Italy
{giorgio.oronzo.spagnolo,stefania.gnesi}@isti.cnr.it
Abstract. We present the integration of BEBoP - understandaBility vErifier for
Business Process models, into the Apromore open-source process analytics plat-
form. Given a BPMN model the tool allows one to verify which understandability
modeling guidelines such as layout conventions are violated by the model. Such
guidelines are rules that a model designer should follow to guarantee that the de-
signed model is easy to understand by relevant stakeholders. Given the variety of
stakeholders that need to interpret these models, and considering the pivotal func-
tion that process models play within organizations, understandability becomes a
fundamental quality requirement that needs to be taken into account by design-
ers. The tool provides model designers with textual and graphical representations
of which understandaiblity guidelines are violated. Designers can then decide to
repair models in such a way to guarantee a higher degree of understandability.
1 Significance and Maturity
The literature shows that business process modeling has been identified as an important
phase in BPM [8], and the benefits of its use in practice are well recognized [3]. At the
same time the quality of models resulting from the modeling phase is critical for the
success of an organization [7]. In particular, the designed models must fit with the real-
ity, and they must be considered understandable by all the stakeholders interested in the
information they convey. Many contributions can be found in the literature which pro-
pose modeling guidelines to guarantee model understandability. However those guide-
lines are scattered among many different works [5, 10, 11], which in general do not use
a homogeneous template to describe them [6]. In [2] the authors tried to overcome those
issues by collecting understandability guidelines for modeling business processes from
the literature, synthesizing and presenting them in a homogeneous format; for each
guideline they provide a template including the following fields: an ID and a Name to
uniquely identify the guideline, a Description to provide an explanation of the guide-
line, References to report the original guidelines source allowing the users to access
additional materials about the guideline itself, Metrics and Thresholds to assess the ad-
herence of a model to a guideline, an Example to graphically display the application
2 Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Authors’ Instructions
of the guideline to a practical scenario, and to highlight the differences between good
and bad modeling practices. The result is a list of 50 guidelines [2] which have been
organized into categories. General includes guidelines that impact on different aspects
of the overall BPMN modeling practice. Notation includes guidelines on the usage of
the BPMN syntax. Labeling includes guidelines for the assignment of proper labels to
BPMN elements. Patterns includes guidelines that suggest a specific arrangement of
BPMN elements. Appearance includes guidelines for a clear presentation of the BP
model. In order to validate these guidelines the authors submitted a questionnaire to the
Public Administrations and the Academic contexts targeting employees, students, re-
searchers, professors and managers. From the obtained answers they wanted to deduct
if the guidelines were perceived being useful and if models designed following the
guidelines would be perceived as more understandable.
Although commercial tools are available that check a considerable number of guide-
lines, no open source tool existed for this task. The authors of [2] proceeded with their
work developing an open-source tool called BEBoP4 to automatically verify under-
standabilty modeling guidelines over BPMN models. This enables BPMN models de-
signers to obtain feedback on the level of understandability of their designed models.
BEBoP5 has been developed in the context of the European project Learn PAd6 and al-
lows the automatic checking of understandability guidelines over BPMN models. BE-
BoP is developed as a Web service, and its graphical user interface can be accessed
by users through any Web browser.7 The service can be accessed by other software
through its RESTful interface, and the tool can be integrated as a plug-in into other
existing tools, and extended if required. The tool takes as input a BPMN model and al-
lows one to automatically verify 34 of the 50 guidelines over the selected model; these
34 guidelines are the ones that have an associated metric and thresholds, or refer to the
presence/absence of BPMN elements and their associated labels. For each guideline,
the tool implements an algorithm for its check.
Several commercial tools exist to verify quality aspects of BP models. Among such
tools, we have Signavio 10.1,8 No Magic MagicDraw 18,9 Bizagi Process Modeler 3.010
and Camunda Community Edition.11 All these tools provide business process model
editing capabilities besides the ability to check understandability guidelines. With re-
spect to the 50 guidelines identified in [2], BEBoP allows one to automatically verify
34 guidelines, Signavio 22, MagicDraw 8, Bizagi 7, and Camunda 5.
Our tool has been tested over the European Project Budget Reporting scenario
(EPBR), which was a case study for Learn PAd. EPBR refers to a set of processes
4
BEBoP source code: https://goo.gl/zrd6z9
5
BEBoP has been developed by the CNR Institute of Pisa in collaboration with the University
of Camerino
6
Learn PAd website: http://www.learnpad.eu/
7
BEBoP web service interface: https://goo.gl/8XEi6s
8
http://www.signavio.com/products/process-editor/
9
http://www.nomagic.com/products/cameo-business-modeler.html
10
http://www.bizagi.com/en/products/bpm-suite/modeler
11
https://camunda.org/download/modeler/
Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Authors’ Instructions 3
performed by public administrations that received a research grant from the European
Union.
One tool for managing business processes that has been developed in the BPM com-
munity, and that is under a constant growth, is Apromore12 [4]. Apromore is the result
of over seven years of ongoing development and is currently in version 5.0. The plat-
form is implemented via a service-oriented architecture and deployed as a Software as
a Service. The technologies used in Apromore combine Spring as the Java develop-
ment framework, Maven as the dependency manager, OSGi as the plugin architecture,
EclipseVirgo as the OSGi-based application server, and ZK as the AJAX front end. The
chosen technologies allow Apromore to be an extensible framework, where new plugins
can be easily added to an ecosystem of advanced business process analytics capabilities.
Since the utility of having guidelines for modeling understandable business processes
is confirmed by the literature [1, 9] we decided to introduce this functionality into the
Apromore repository by an integration with the BEBoP web service.
2 BEBoP - Apromore integration
The BEBoP tool has been integrated into Apromore in the form of a plugin for “Portal”
and another for the “Editor” environment. The Apromore Portal provides users with
a way to navigate the model repository, having a general view over the stored models.
Regarding our plugin, from the portal environment one can select a BPMN model in the
.bpmn format from Apromore’s repository and ask for a check of the understandabil-
ity modeling guidelines calling the related plugin from the “BEBoP-Guidelines Check”
item under the dropdown menu named “Analyze” as shown on the left-hand side of Fig.
1. Once the user has requested the guidelines check, an additional tab in the portal is
displayed reporting a list of the violated guidelines with name and description as shown
on the right-hand side of Fig.1. This view allows the user to have just an overview of
which guidelines are violated. For a better understanding of which are the involved ele-
ments that do not meet the guidelines, the user is asked to open the model accessing the
Editor environment. The Apromore Editor allows users to create models and regarding
our plugin, from the Editor model designers can ask for a check of the understandabil-
ity modeling guidelines over the model they are designing. The user is prompted with
a window listing the violated guidelines and the BPMN elements that violate them, as
shown in Fig.2. From the figure we can notice that one element of type “Task” violates
the “Activity Description” guideline which suggests designers to provide a description
for each activity in the model. The window displayed to the user consists of two parts:
the left part “Guidelines Violated” containing a grid with all the information about the
BPMN elements violating the guidelines, and the right part “Guideline Description”
displaying which guideline has been violated by which BPMN element. While the left
part content is static, basically presenting the information about BPMN elements with:
label, type and id of the element; the content on the right part dynamically changes
based on which element of the grid the user selects. In this way, the name of the guide-
line, violated by the selected element, and its description, are displayed to the user as
12
Apromore website: www.apromore.org
4 Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Authors’ Instructions
Fig. 1. BEBoP-Guidelines Portal View. Left: selection of a model and request for guidelines
check. Right: extract of the resulting list of violated guidelines.
Fig. 2. Textual and graphical presentation of the guidelines on top of a BPMN model.
shown in Fig. 2. At the same time, when an element is selected from the grid, it is also
highlighted, using the red color, in the actual graphical representation of the model. This
Lecture Notes in Computer Science: Authors’ Instructions 5
allows a faster recognition of the BPMN element violating the guideline and leaves to
the user the possibility to correct the guideline violation.
3 Screencast and Links
A screencast is available at https://youtu.be/8LToEahCf2Q. This video illus-
trates a typical scenario where the user requires to check a BPMN model against the
understandability guidelines. The BEBoP integration is embedded as a set of OSGi plu-
gins into the online process analytics platform Apromore, which has been used for the
screencast (http://apromore.org).
References
1. Becker, J., Rosemann, M., & Von Uthmann, C.: Guidelines of business process modeling. In
Business Process Management (pp. 30-49). Springer Berlin Heidelberg (2000)
2. Corradini F, Ferrari A, Fornari F, Gnesi S, Polini A, Re B, Spagnolo G.: Qual-
ity assessment strategy: Applying business process understandability guidelines
for learning. Tech. Rep. 4.1, ISTI-CNR, University of Camerino, Italy, URL
http://puma.isti.cnr.it/linkdoc.php?idauth=1&idcol=1&icode=
2015-TR-034&authority=cnr.isti&collection=cnr.isti&langver=it
(2015)
3. Indulska, M., Green, P., Recker, J., & Rosemann, M.: Business process modeling: Perceived
benefits. In International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (pp. 458-471). Springer Berlin
Heidelberg (2009).
4. La Rosa, M., Reijers, H. A., Van Der Aalst, W. M., Dijkman, R. M., Mendling, J., Dumas, M.,
& GarcA-BaUelos, L.: APROMORE: An advanced process model repository. Expert Systems
with Applications, 38(6), 7029-7040 (2011)
5. Mendling, J., Reijers, H. A., & van der Aalst, W. M.: Seven process modeling guidelines
(7PMG). Information and Software Technology, 52(2), 127-136 (2010)
6. Moreno-Montes de Oca, I., & Snoeck, M.: Pragmatic guidelines for business process model-
ing (2014)
7. de Oca, I. M. M., Snoeck, M., Reijers, H. A., & Rodrguez-Morffi, A.: A systematic literature
review of studies on business process modeling quality. Information and Software Technology,
58, 187-205 (2015)
8. Kalpic, B., & Bernus, P.: Business process modelling in industrythe powerful tool in enterprise
management. Computers in industry, 47(3), 299-318 (2002)
9. Schuette, R., & Rotthowe, T.: The guidelines of modelingan approach to enhance the quality
in information models. In International Conference on Conceptual Modeling (pp. 240-254).
Springer Berlin Heidelberg (1998)
10. White, S. A.: BPMN modeling and reference guide: understanding and using BPMN. Future
Strategies Inc. (2008)
11. Silver, B.: BPMN Method and Style, with BPMN Implementers Guide: A structured ap-
proach for business process modeling and implementation using BPMN 2.0. Cody-Cassidy
Press, Aptos, CA, 450 (2011)